To rigid or not to rigid?

Richard Goodman <[email hidden]> wrote:

: Still, the sus forks absorb the bigger hits I suppose.
: But are they worth it for that? I suppose that in
: general, sus forks must offer more than just comfort as
: people do race with them, but the question I have to ask
: myself is, would _I_ be faster with _my_ rigids or _my_
: sus forks? Are the sus forks doing anything useful or
: just sapping energy? Hmm....

Maybe. But you'd be faster still with some decent sus forks
unless you only ride very smooth stuff. There's good
reasons why people race with sus forks (quick going down,
and more traction)

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune clune.orgclune.orgOpen ↗ "Technolibertarians make a
philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

in message <[email hidden]>, Richard Goodman

(') said:

To put rigid forks on my mtb or not? That is the question.
The point is, I have a pair of rigid forks that are
probably around 3lbs lighter than the cheapo sus forks
that I have, and a) a lot of XC mtbiking involves going
_up_ hill, and peddaling a lighter weight uphill is easier
than a heavier one (especially if it has to be done
repeatedly at the highest possible speed over the period
of about an hour) and b) I'm a fairly lightweight person
and 3lbs represents a higher percentage of bike+rider
weight and makes more difference to power to weight ratio
for me than it would for a lot of you lot - well, maybe
something over 2% but hey, I'm talking about a situation
where every second counts! And c) my cheapo sus forks
don't seem to compress as much as they might for a heavier
rider anyway - I guess they have medium-weight elastomers
in and even at the lightest pre-load setting they still
seem to skip over the smaller bumps a lot.

I rode a rigid mountain bike for fifteen years, and went
some very rough places with it. It was OK. Indeed, although
it was heavier than the full suspension bikes I ride these
days, and nothing like as capable, it did have one
advantage. It was a lot easier to carry - you just slung it
on your shoulder like a cyclocross bike, which you can't do
with most modern full suspension designs.

And [censored] suspension is probably worse than no suspension.
And weight (as you know) definitely does count.

So I would say go for it, but take your downhills a bit easy
until you get used to what it will do - and what it won't.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke)
jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

...but have you *seen* the size of the world
wide spider?

"Richard Goodman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

but the question I have to ask myself is, would _I_
be faster with _my_ rigids or _my_ sus forks? Are the
sus forks doing anything useful or just sapping
energy? Hmm....

Only you can provide an answer to that. Rigids are fine for
smoother trails and/or shorter ride times but get very
tiring on longer rides which in itself can slow you down.
The absorbtion of bumps by a decent suss fork is supposed to
be more efficient.

Good suss forks should be better than rigids on rough
surfaces but rigids will be better than poor suss forks.

Me? I'd never ride rigids for more than an hour off-road,
and I currently have a fully rigid as well as a full susser.
--
Regards, Pete

Richard Goodman said:

To put rigid forks on my mtb or not?

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Still, the sus forks absorb the bigger hits I suppose.
But are they worth it for that? I suppose that in
general, sus forks must offer more than just comfort as
people do race with them, but the question I have to ask
myself is, would _I_ be faster with _my_ rigids or _my_
sus forks? Are the sus forks doing anything useful or
just sapping energy? Hmm....

With a rigid fork, if you hit anything beyond the suspension
capacity of the tyres then the bike and rider all have to go
/up/. This loses you energy and thus speed, as well as
comfort, and anytime the front wheel is off the ground you
can't actually control the steering. Suspension gives you
more efficiency and control at any moderate sort of speed,
which not only makes it more fun but a lot safer too!

I think the question is not "should I replace my cheapo sus
forks with rigid" but "how much can I spend on good sus
forks". Better ones will lock out on the fly so you don't
lose out further on climbs from pogoing the bike.

The only reason I run a rigid is when I bought it in '97 sus
forks cost Real Money even for moderately okay ones, and I
didn't have it. These days I wouldn't dream of a new rigid
MTB but my existing one doesn't get enough use to justify
spending the upgrade money on. But it's last big trip I was
left out of sight by a pal on a good hardtail (I could climb
as well, but anything that involved actual speed, not a
chance). And his wrists didn't feel they'd been attacked by
a team of martial artists afterwards.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext.
33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177
Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email hidden]
dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

With a rigid fork, if you hit anything beyond the
suspension capacity of the tyres then the bike and rider
all have to go /up/. This loses you energy and thus
speed, as well as comfort, and anytime the front wheel is
off the ground you can't actually control the steering.
Suspension gives you more efficiency and control at any
moderate sort of speed, which not only makes it more fun
but a lot safer too!

I think the question is not "should I replace my cheapo
sus forks with rigid" but "how much can I spend on good
sus forks".

Thanks Pete, and others who responded. I was logically
inclined to think that might be the case, without having
actually tried it, but, apart from the strong temptation
of losing a lot of weight without actually spending any
money, one thing still keeps leading me to wonder whether
it is worth trying. This is that cyclocrossers do it with
rigid forks. Not only rigid forks, but much narrower
knobblies too...?

I dunno. Maybe I will and maybe I won't. My (very) modest
race activities, and even more modest abilities and
ambitions mean that I am disinclined to spend more than the
whole bike is worth for a nice lightweight sus fork! If I
did it I don't think I could stop there - then there'd have
to be carbon bars and a carbon seatpost, then I might as
well get a new frame... It was only supposed to be for fun!

Rich

Richard Goodman <[email hidden]> wrote:

: trying. This is that cyclocrossers do it with rigid forks.
: Not only rigid forks, but much narrower knobblies too...?

Cyclocrossers do it......on much easier terrain. For short
distances/times. And with frequent bike changes.

So, it depends. If you stick to canal towpaths and easy
bridleways then rigid will be just as good.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune clune.orgclune.orgOpen ↗ "Technolibertarians make a
philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

in message
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This is that cyclocrossers do it with rigid forks. Not
only rigid forks, but much narrower knobblies too...?

Quoted message said:

And they spend a lot of time carrying their bikes. They
carry in places a decent mountain bike would ride with
ease. As, indeed, I used to with my rigid before I saw the
light and went full suss.

Oh dear, oh well, I think I shall just have to defer to the
greater wisdom and experience of this group. I think I can
feel some spending coming on.... If wifey objects, I'll just
have to blame urc 😉. You made me do it!

Rich

in message <[email hidden]>, Richard

Goodman (') said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3dhbo1-
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

in message
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This is that cyclocrossers do it with rigid forks. Not
only rigid forks, but much narrower knobblies too...?

Quoted message said:

And they spend a lot of time carrying their bikes. They
carry in places a decent mountain bike would ride with
ease. As, indeed, I used to with my rigid before I saw
the light and went full suss.

Oh dear, oh well, I think I shall just have to defer to
the greater wisdom and experience of this group. I think I
can feel some spending coming on.... If wifey objects,
I'll just have to blame urc 😉. You made me do it!

Hey! I didn't! If you read back upthread you'll see that I
said you would probably be better with good rigids than with
cheap suss forks! You would, however, have to carry your
bike quite a lot, if you do serious off-roading.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke)
jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

Richard Goodman said:

Oh dear, oh well, I think I shall just have to defer to
the greater wisdom and experience of this group. I think I
can feel some spending coming on.... If wifey objects,
I'll just have to blame urc 😉. You made me do it!

Though do note that if your bike has cheapo sus forks 'cause
it's a cheapo frame you'd probably be better off just
upgrading the whole shooting match. Bikes are much cheaper
if you buy as a whole at a level rather than source all the
bits individually.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext.
33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177
Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email hidden]
dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Though do note that if your bike has cheapo sus forks
'cause it's a cheapo frame you'd probably be better off
just upgrading the whole shooting match. Bikes are much
cheaper if you buy as a whole at a level rather than
source all the bits individually.

Ah, but I didn't say what I might be spending on 😉 I can
see you're leading me further into temptation....

Rich